╌>

Florida sheriff's office releases bodycam video of fatal shooting of Air Force airman by deputy

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  2 weeks ago  •  120 comments

By:   NBC News

Florida sheriff's office releases bodycam video of fatal shooting of Air Force airman by deputy
The Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office released police body camera video Thursday showing one of its deputies shooting and killing an Air Force airman at his off-base apartment last week.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


May 9, 2024, 6:33 PM UTC / Updated May 9, 2024, 8:01 PM UTCBy Janelle Griffith

The Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office released police body camera video Thursday showing one of its deputies shooting and killing an Air Force airman at his off-base apartment last week.

Senior Airman Roger Fortson, 23, was shot late Friday afternoon by a deputy responding to a call of a disturbance in progress, the sheriff's office said. Okaloosa County is in the Florida Panhandle, east of Pensacola.

The video, which lasts just more than four minutes, begins as the deputy arrives at Fortson's apartment complex and ends after Fortson has been shot and the deputy calls for medical assistance.

Earlier Thursday, attorneys for Fortson's family had called for the sheriff's office to "correct the narrative" surrounding his death, saying that he had done nothing wrong before being fatally shot and that the deputy had gone to the wrong door.

At a news conference hours later, Sheriff Eric Aden said no determination had been made as to whether the deputy's actions were justified.

"I want to assure you that we are not hiding or covering up or taking action that would result in a rush to judgment of Mr. Fortson or our deputy," Aden said.

He said the deputy had not entered the wrong apartment or forced his way into Fortson's residence, and that the deputy twice identified himself. Aden did not take any questions from reporters.

Fortson's mother and her attorneys said at a news conference that his girlfriend, who was on a FaceTime call with him throughout the encounter, said that the deputy burst into the wrong unit and fatally shot Fortson when he saw he was armed with a gun. They said the girlfriend, who did not attend the news conference, was distraught. They watched the video after their news conference and before it was released publicly.

The video shows the deputy arriving on scene and being directed to apartment 1401 by a woman whose face is blurred. The woman tells him that someone had overheard arguing there.

The video shows the deputy knocking and twice saying, "Sheriff's office. Open the door."

When Fortson opens the door, he appears to be holding a gun that is facing downward. The deputy says, "Step back," and fires his weapon multiple times. Fortson falls to the floor. The deputy twice yells, "Drop the gun," to which Fortson replies, "It's over there."

The deputy then calls for medical assistance.

"He lost his life because they knocked on the wrong door. Mistakes happen. We know that," said Brian Barr, one of the family's attorneys, before the video was released. "Humans aren't perfect. Good people make mistakes. But good people also own their mistakes."

U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Roger Fortson, 23.U.S. Air Force

He said the sheriff's office, through its statement about the shooting, had misled the public.

"You go pick it up and read it. What's it make you think? It makes you think this happened outside. That this kid was in the middle of a disturbance," Barr said. "And he did something. He instigated this and lost his life. That's what it makes it sound like. It sounded justified. That's what they tried to make it sound like."

In its statement, the sheriff's office said: "Our deputy responded to a call of a disturbance in progress where he encountered an armed man. The deputy shot the man, who later succumbed to his injuries."

Civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump, who is also representing Fortson's family, had also criticized the sheriff's office's account before the video's release.

Fortson's mother, Chantimekki Fortson, held a framed photograph of her son in his uniform. She said he had aspired to be in the Air Force since he was a young boy and was living his dream. She described him as compassionate, intelligent, loving and respectful.

She implored the sheriff's department, which she said, "took my gift," to release more information about the encounter.

"I need you to get his reputation right," Chantimekki Fortson said. "Tell the truth about my son. I know my son didn't do anything to you guys. Please clean my baby's reputation."

After the video's release, Fortson's family said in a statement: "In the four-and-a-half minute, heavily redacted video, it is very troubling that the deputy gave no verbal commands and shot multiple times within a split second of the door being opened, killing Roger."

They said the video has provided some answers, but "also raised even more troubling questions." They questioned, among other things, why the deputy didn't tell Fortson to drop his weapon before shooting and whether he had tried to initiate lifesaving measures. They also said that even though Fortson's girlfriend initially thought his apartment door had been forced open, she stands by her account and will speak publicly in the near future.

The sheriff's office has said the deputy, who has not been publicly identified, heard "sounds of a disturbance" and "reacted in self defense" after he encountered Fortson armed with a gun and after he had identified himself as law enforcement.

But Fortson's mother and her attorneys said that Fortson was on the FaceTime call with his girlfriend during the entire encounter and that he was home alone when he heard a knock at his door. He asked, "Who is it?" but didn't get a response, Crump said in a statement Wednesday and at his news conference.

Crump said Thursday that Fortson did not see anyone when he looked through the peephole and it appeared as if someone was covering it, citing the girlfriend. The video does not appear to show the deputy cover the peephole. He appears to be standing to the side of the door when he knocks and announces himself the first time.

Fortson believed someone was attempting to break into his apartment, Barr said. So he retrieved his gun, which his family's attorneys said was legally owned. As he walked back through his living room, law enforcement burst through the door, saw that Fortson was armed and shot him six times, according to the girlfriend's account. He was taken to a hospital where he later died, the sheriff's office said.

The girlfriend said she saw Fortson on the ground saying, "I can't breathe," after he was shot. She said she believed law enforcement had gone to the wrong unit, because there was no disturbance in Fortson's apartment and he was home alone.

Chantimekki Fortson said her son's girlfriend called her while she was still on the FaceTime call. The grieving mother said her son was shot three times in the chest and three times in the left arm.

Fortson was assigned to the 4th Special Operations Squadron. Hurlburt Field, the Air Force base where he was assigned, said in a statement that he entered active duty on Nov. 19, 2019.

In a statement late Tuesday, Aden said he "immediately" placed the deputy on administrative leave and asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to conduct an investigation, as required by policy. He said the Florida State Attorney's Office would also conduct an independent review.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed it was investigating the shooting and declined to comment further.

Crump compared Fortson's killing to that of Botham Jean, an unarmed Black man who was shot and killed in 2018 by a white, off-duty Dallas police officer who mistook his apartment for her own. Amber Guyger was found guilty of murder the following year and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Crump represented Jean's family, as well as the families of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, who were also killed by police.

Janelle Griffith


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

This is to correct a so-called story posted on our front page.

Air Force Airman Killed By Florida Deputies Who Were At Wrong Apartment, Attorney Says - Community | The NewsTalkers

The facts are now in and it turns out that the police did identify themselves:

This lie could have caused riots:

the woman on the FaceTime call, whom Crump did not identify, Fortson heard a knock at his door, asked "Who is it?" got no response and could not see anyone through the peephole, Crump said in a statement.

That woman needs to be identified and the race baiting Ben Crump needs to be disbarred

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
1.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago
This lie could have caused riots:

It still might

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.1    2 weeks ago

Of course, we saw the kind of mentality that bought Crump's obvious bullshit.

Rational people call it CONFIRMATION BIAS!

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.1    2 weeks ago
It still might

As we witnessed during the "Summer of love" 2020 riots over a convicted drug addicted felon that died from complications of having drugs in his system when he resisted officers.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.2  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago

This comment is offensive. A young Airman is dead and under a questionable shooting by a sheriff's deputy. There is no reason for this attack upon the woman on the phone, whom by definition, was not present or properly 'sighted' into the happening in the apartment-leading to a minor clarification. There is no reason for you to try to turn the narrative away from the death to a defense of a wrongful shooting!

As for Benjamin Crump being there. . . he has likely been called by the family. . . consequently, he exercised his freedom to appear and speak accordingly. Also, there is a civil (and possibly a separate criminal case here). . . in need of a litigator: Benjamin Crump. Resulting to calling him a "race-baiter" is wrong-headed. He is a civil rights attorney and this has all the hallmarks of a civil rights violation.

I find your tone on this matter disgusting.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  CB @1.2    2 weeks ago
There is no reason for this attack upon the woman on the phone, whom by definition, was not present or properly 'sighted' into the happening in the apartment-leading to a minor clarification.

Why not? She lied.


There is no reason for you to try to turn the narrative away from the death to a defense of a wrongful shooting!

There is a reason: The earlier skewed story which 10 of you voted right up.


. He is a civil rights attorney and this has all the hallmarks of a civil rights violation.

He put out a very dangerous narrative which could have led to violence.


 find your tone on this matter disgusting.

And I find these types of stories on the front page to be inflammatory.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.2.2  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    2 weeks ago

Bull. She did not lie. She told the truth as she knew it. And, of course, she would tell it because I am sure early on she was asked what she knew (through her real-time phone call). Let us not be ridiculously petty to pretend like we don't understand the process—I won't be explaining it because we are all experienced enough to know how this could work.

I would not worry about votes on the internet as they are simply that. And up until the video is released people ("voters") can share what they believe-until something different becomes material. 

You have proven nothing that allows for your tone on this matter. The narrative is slowly being corrected by video evidence. Up until its presentation. . . people are 'free' to say what they believe happened-according to their understanding. We always knew it might be subjected to updating the narrative. Once, twice, and maybe several more times.

Ease up. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @1.2.2    2 weeks ago
She told the truth as she knew it.

Perhaps both the girlfriend and the Sherif told the truth as they know it.  Of course that doesn’t stop some from calling lies before the investigation is really underway.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.2.4  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.3    2 weeks ago

Your comment in not clear to me. Please clean it up.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @1.2.4    2 weeks ago

What is unclear, what do you want ‘cleaned up’?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.6  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    2 weeks ago
She lied

PROVE IT.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.7  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.6    2 weeks ago

It's right there in the article:

The video shows the deputy knocking and twice saying, "Sheriff's office. Open the door."

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.8  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.7    2 weeks ago

PROVE THAT A WOMAN ON FACETIME WAS ABLE TO HEAR, OR ACTUALLY HEARD, WHAT A SHERIFF OUTSIDE THE APARTMENT SAID.

WHAT IS YOUR PROOF?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.8    2 weeks ago
PROVE THAT A WOMAN ON FACETIME WAS ABLE TO HEAR, OR ACTUALLY HEARD, WHAT A SHERIFF OUTSIDE THE APARTMENT SAID.

How silly, prove that she didn't. 

Why the need to rush to judgement?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.10  Gsquared  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.9    2 weeks ago

Your comment and question should be directed to Vic, not me.  He is the one making the allegation and rushing to judgment.  I'm merely challenging his unproven allegation, if you are able to understand that.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
1.2.11  Thomas  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.9    2 weeks ago
Why the need to rush to judgement?

Who says he is rushing to judgement? Sounds like he is trying to establish facts.

And why the need to leap to a defensive position?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.12  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Thomas @1.2.11    2 weeks ago
Who says he is rushing to judgement? Sounds like he is trying to establish facts.

I did.  Gsquared isn't going to establish facts, perhaps the investigation will.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.13  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.10    2 weeks ago
if you are able to understand that.

I'm able to see, not understand, the rush to judgement from folks here as well as the family.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.14  Gsquared  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.12    2 weeks ago

You're quite obviously confused.  Clearly, the allegation that the woman lied is the rush to judgment here.  I'm challenging that.  I have no way of knowing one way or the other if the woman lied.  The salient point is that neither does Vic, the person making the allegation, and calling for retribution against the woman, as if his allegation is a fact.  

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.15  devangelical  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.10    2 weeks ago

I hope that sheriff's dept gets sued sideways by the family, and then gets sued sideways by the USAF. time to get all the trigger happy klan relics off the force.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.16  Gsquared  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.13    2 weeks ago

You should direct your comment to the person engaged in the rush to judgment.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.17  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.14    2 weeks ago

You're quite obviously confused. 

I'm not confused at all, I see the typical pattern of folks here as well as across the county, picking sides before much evidence is available.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.2.18  bugsy  replied to  devangelical @1.2.15    2 weeks ago

Surely you don't think that all southern white cops are members of the KKK, do you? s/

BTW, how much are you donating to meet the demands of illegals in Denver?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.19  Gsquared  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.17    2 weeks ago

Your Comment 1.2.9 shows that you are most certainly confused, if, in fact, you are under the misapprehension that I am rushing to judgment about anything.  Other than your obvious confusion, of course.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.20  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @1.2.15    2 weeks ago

Hope isn’t a method and I don’t know of cases were the military has sued a county.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.21  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.19    2 weeks ago
Your Comment 1.2.9 shows that you are most certainly confused, if, in fact, you are under the misapprehension that I am rushing to judgment about anything.  Other than your obvious confusion, of course.

That’s a confusing comment.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.22  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @1.2.15    2 weeks ago

Do we know the race of the deputy?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.23  Gsquared  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.21    2 weeks ago

I freely admit to making an immediate judgment about your obvious confusion because it is, well, obvious.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.24  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.23    2 weeks ago

Premature speculation seems a common occurrence here.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.2.25  Gsquared  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.24    2 weeks ago

That's something between you and your ED specialist, ED standing for Explanatory Dysfunction, as you may be aware.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.26  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2.15    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.27  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gsquared @1.2.25    2 weeks ago
That's something between you and your ED specialist, ED standing for Explanatory Dysfunction.

No ED specialist here, just a Urologist for an enlarged prostate.  I chose a female urologist because I thought that she had to be more skilled to make it and of course the more slender finger was comforting.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.2.28  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.13    2 weeks ago

You see nothing. We accepted the narrative presented in an article. . . as best and as well as we could. That is what all of us—including you do here on a daily basis. Cut the bull.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.29  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2.15    2 weeks ago

Yup, a bunch of cockroaches,

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.30  devangelical  replied to  bugsy @1.2.18    2 weeks ago
BTW, how much are you donating to meet the demands of illegals in Denver?

I have 3 asylum seekers in my family now. we had to support them for 18 months because republicans have hamstrung the entire process of getting approvals done by not funding more gov't immigration employees and judges, creating a huge backlog. I contributed $500 per month for a year to them, since they came here with only the clothes on their backs. they call me grandpa.

wanting to support themselves, they got bored after several months and got fast food jobs that paid them below minimum wage with gift cards. my son and I turned the rwnj franchise operators into both immigration and into the IRS bounty program, after they got their work visas and immunity from prosecution as gov't witnesses, with the help of another family member. they have their own apartment now, 2 cars, and are living the american dream.

it seems that both fast food franchises now have new operators. bummer, huh?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.31  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2.30    2 weeks ago

That's freaking awesome!  YOU are freaking awesome.

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.33  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @1.2.28    2 weeks ago
We accepted the narrative presented in an article. 

Why?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.2.34  bugsy  replied to  devangelical @1.2.30    2 weeks ago
I have 3 asylum seekers in my family now.

So you are aiding and abetting illegals.

"epublicans have hamstrung the entire process of getting approvals done by not funding more gov't immigration employees and judges, creating a huge backlog"

Of course that is not true, but if it were, it is all thanks to Biden's open border to let pretty much anybody come over.

"I contributed $500 per month for a year to them, since they came here with only the clothes on their backs. "

Your money to waste.

"they call me grandpa."

They are using you

"my son and I turned the rwnj franchise operators into both immigration and into the IRS bounty program,"

More than likely bs.

"after they got their work visas and immunity from prosecution as gov't witnesses,"

In Biden's illegal world, pretty much all illegals receive something similar.

"they have their own apartment now, 2 cars, and are living the american dream."

Thanks to uncle Sam and the gullible that gave them 500 a month. Also, it has been noticed that you spelled "American" with a small "A". No one is  surprised by this.

"t seems that both fast food franchises now have new operators."

So? Fast food restaurants change management hands quite frequently

"bummer, huh?"

Don't care.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.3  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago
The facts are now in and it turns out that the police did identify themselves:

Yes he did, twice through a closed door.

This lie could have caused riots:

Shooting and killing an innocent man can certainly do that.

That woman needs to be identified and the race baiting Ben Crump needs to be disbarred

I would think that the police would know who she is, you know telephones, traces, either landline or mobile and she has been ID as his girlfriend plus per your article, the airman's mother ID her as her son's girlfriend. And there is no reason at this point to ID her simply because you think it necessary.

and the race baiting Ben Crump needs to be disbarred

If you read your article and the conversations that took place what could Crump be disbarred for in your opinion other than your hate for him or because he is black?

So because Crump is a very successful civil rights lawyer in your opinion he is a race-baiter. Do you have any other personal conclusions that you jumped to, Eg, because he is black because he is black and is highly thought of as a civil rights attorney, or simply because he's black he is a race baiter? Your slip is showing, Vic.

BTW, it seems that the LEO was at the wrong apartment since there was no disturbance and the women at the apartment building should be held and questions since she was the one that said, ''it was up there''.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kavika @1.3    2 weeks ago
Yes he did, twice through a closed door.

That's right. Remember our little discussion.


And there is no reason at this point to ID her simply because you think it necessary.

People who lie in a case like this?  At the very least she should be held accountable.


If you read your article and the conversations that took place what could Crump be disbarred for in your opinion other than your hate for him or because he is black?

You are skirting again. Btw, there was a lot of animosity towards me on the original article, now you imply racism.

As to your question about Crump: Look at what he said in the case of Andrew Brown. He does it all the time and you bought it.


So because Crump is a very successful civil rights lawyer in your opinion he is a race-baiter. Do you have any other personal conclusions that you jumped to, Eg, because he is black because he is black and is highly thought of as a civil rights attorney, or simply because he's black he is a race baiter? Your slip is showing, Vic.

You are still calling me a racist, but I know they won't give you a ticket, so I won't bother flagging it.

It is called CONFIRMATION BIAS and you got caught.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.3.2  CB  replied to  Kavika @1.3    2 weeks ago
Your slip is showing, Vic.

Okay Kavika—read! 256   (A brief moment of levity.)

On a serious note: That woman, who identified the apartment ("1401") probably feels terrible and 'damaged' after sending that officer up to the apartment. Regret can be a monster and haunting. Also, this is a classic example of why some people avoid calling the police like avoiding the plague to begin with as a past experience can show just how making the 'call' can get someone killed and a case for 'you' to have to testify in a court setting. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.3.3  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.1    2 weeks ago
That's right. Remember our little discussion.

In the other article, I sure do and so what, you best quit reaching for straws.

People who lie in a case like this?  At the very least she should be held accountable.

No one lied, they repeated what they heard, simple as that. 

You are skirting again. Btw, there was a lot of animosity towards me on the original article, now you imply racism.

It's your opinion that there is animosity towards you, it's simply putting your BS to rest as for implying racism, if that is what you believe that I'm doing you could deny it or confirm it, since you've done neither our members and readers are left to their own thoughts and conclusions on it.

As to your question about Crump: Look at what he said in the case of Andrew Brown. He does it all the time and you bought it.

This isn't the Andrew Brown case, Vic. 

You are still calling me a racist, but I know they won't give you a ticket, so I won't bother flagging it.

No,  not accurate, I gave you a chance to explain why you feel so hostile to Crump if you chose to interpret that as calling you a racist, that is on you and we'll let our members and readers again draw their conclusions. 

I'm sure that I would get a ticket if I called you a racist, I don't know why you would think that I wouldn't. Perhaps you're a bit paranoid when dealing with a minority, kind of out of your safe zone when dealing with someone that isn't white and has more experience with racism in every form in my lifetime than you could imagine. 

It is called CONFIRMATION BIAS and you got caught.

Actually, it's called facts vs bs and personal opinion and if anyone got caught it would be you.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
1.3.4  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.1    2 weeks ago
Btw, there was a lot of animosity towards me on the original article, now you imply racism.

There is a reason. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.4  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago
That woman needs to be identified

Why?  So she can start getting death threats?  To force her into hiding?  To ruin her life?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.4.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gsquared @1.4    2 weeks ago
Why?

I hate repeating myself.

Post 1.3.1

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
1.4.2  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.4.1    2 weeks ago

Prove she heard the police.  Prove she lied.  

We're waiting.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.4.3  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.4.1    2 weeks ago

You have got no reason to question her motives, nor to call her a liar. She is not the story here! It's making her a distraction. And that, too, is disgusting. The story is a dead Airman, 23 years old shot by sheriff's deputy.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.4.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @1.4.3    2 weeks ago
The story is a dead Airman, 23 years old shot by sheriff's deputy.

Are you questioning the deputy's motives?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.4.5  devangelical  replied to  Gsquared @1.4    2 weeks ago
Why?  So she can start getting death threats?  To force her into hiding?  To ruin her life?

the maga MO...

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
1.5  Colour Me Free  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago
That woman needs to be identified and the race baiting Ben Crump needs to be disbarred

Why? ... 

"Sheriff's office. Open the door."

I suppose that could be announcing oneself, but ...through a closed door ... where was the disturbance, who was this disturbance with that the deputy heard sounds of??  I believe that I would have had a M&P in my hands when opening the door to an alleged deputy that did not have his / her badge presented through the peep hole

I am no fan of Crumb, he is an ambulance chaser ... but doxing the girlfriend, why? she did not kill anyone ... identify the deputy first.

The sheriff's office has said the deputy, who has not been publicly identified, heard "sounds of a disturbance" and "reacted in self defense" after he encountered Fortson armed with a gun and after he had identified himself as law enforcement

At minimum this deputy needs some more training .. I question the validity of the 'self defense' claim.

When Fortson opens the door, he appears to be holding a gun that is facing downward. The deputy says, "Step back," and fires his weapon multiple times. Fortson falls to the floor. The deputy twice yells, "Drop the gun," to which Fortson replies, "It's over there.

The deputy fuck'd up, he shot a man 6 times that was holding a gun pointed downward... ummm the barrel of the weapon pointed downward is 'Gun Safety 101' .. ummm and one says drop the gun before shooting, not after the alleged perp is shot 6 timed and, on the floor.

Peace...

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.5.1  CB  replied to  Colour Me Free @1.5    2 weeks ago
I am no fan of Crumb, he is an ambulance chaser

Nowadays, Crump's reputation for civil rights successes in courts proceed him. I'd imagine he no longer has to "chase'. . . the cases find him out. And all he may have to do is accept or reject any one or number of them (since he can't be 'everywhere' at once).

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2  Right Down the Center    2 weeks ago

"When Fortson opens the door, he appears to be holding a gun that is facing downward. The deputy says, "Step back," and fires his weapon multiple times." 

I think alot of what comes of this tragedy is what the police procedure is when a door is opened and the person has a gun, even if it is pointed down.  If this is the procedure cops are taught then the cop should be in the clear even if the police department might still be on the hook for having what seems to be a shoot first and ask questions later even if the gun is pointed down.

I hope a thorough and complete investigation is done without outside influence and emotion.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    2 weeks ago
I hope a thorough and complete investigation is done without outside influence and emotion.

Now that we have the film & audio it is clear that certain people were lying. They should be charged for perjury & obstruction of justice.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.1.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    2 weeks ago

Yep, but I doubt they will be.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.2  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    2 weeks ago

You can not charge that. And, there is no obstruction of justice, because there is no intent to deceive police or legal officials. Off-base.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.3  CB  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

There is no reason to charge for first impression witness statements. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.1.4  Right Down the Center  replied to  CB @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
because there is no intent to deceive police or legal officials.

How do you know that?  It should be investigated.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.1.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  CB @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

How about investigating lying to police

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.6  CB  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.4    2 weeks ago

Then, when you can prove intent with some material evidence—let us know! Because the silence on that point so far is deafening.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.7  CB  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.5    2 weeks ago

You can stop right there, I do not accept your bias 'reporting' since you have no evidence and the DA has not charged anything. You are trying to put shit in the air. . . and that is what bothers me about some of the things some conservatives say. . .because some conservatives try to STIR UP PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE THEY DON'T LIKE by making phone calls and making "suggestions" that impact ordinary people living. It's self-righteous bull. It's disgusting when that is done.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
2.2  afrayedknot  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    2 weeks ago

“If this is the procedure cops are taught then the cop should be in the clear…”

Then what they are being taught is fraught with tragic consequences. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2    2 weeks ago

And what about Ben Crump and the girlfriend?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.2.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2    2 weeks ago
Then what they are being taught is fraught with tragic consequences. 

Unfortunately that is a possibility but the question still remains, at what point can a cop shoot.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
2.2.3  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

All after the fact.

The bottom line, and one posed without an ulterior motive is and will always be, was the killing of Senior Airman Roger Fortson, 23 justified?

Don’t forget his name. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.2.2    2 weeks ago

They don't think cops should be able to defend themselves.

They hate cops.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2.3    2 weeks ago
Don’t forget his name. 

You all got caught.

The bottom line: CONFIRMATION BIAS

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.2.6  Right Down the Center  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    2 weeks ago

I am sure some will say the person with the gun should be able to get a couple shots off before cops can shoot back.

Unfortunately it is a judgement call.  Anyone can go through all sorts of training but there is no way to be sure of a response for every possible situation until it happens.  Sometimes things just suck.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
2.2.7  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    2 weeks ago

“They hate cops.”

Never presume to speak for those that appreciate the danger they daily face. 

Spewing ‘hate’ does no good, but it seems to be the inevitable fall back position in the sad inability to negotiate the complex times in which we live.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.8  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2.7    2 weeks ago
Spewing ‘hate’ does no good

It seems to be the order of the day at the university.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
2.2.9  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

It is quite possible that the device he was face-timing on did not pick up the officer identifying himself. Also, we do not know his location in the apartment. He could not have been near the front of the apartment, he could have been in the bedroom or bath. We just do not know. 

Gosh, aren't you going to wait till all the facts are in? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.10  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Thomas @2.2.9    2 weeks ago
Gosh, aren't you going to wait till all the facts are in? 

Gosh, IT'S NOT ME....IT'S THOSE WHO BOUGHT THE EARLIER STORY WHO JUMPED THE GUN!

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
2.2.11  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.8    2 weeks ago

“It seems to be the order of the day at the university.”

Not relevant to the discussion, but never miss the opportunity, vic…it is redundant, unnecessary and oh, so, stale.

Again, to keep on track, was the killing of Senior Airman Roger Fortson, 23 justified?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.12  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2.11    2 weeks ago
Not relevant to the discussion,

Very relevant. It all comes from the same place.

Again, to keep on track, was the killing of Senior Airman Roger Fortson, 23 justified?

If it wasn't, why lie about it?

And why vote up a lawyer's lies?

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
2.2.13  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.10    2 weeks ago

No need to yell.

We have a woman whom he was on the phone with, another woman saying "I think it's up there" What about her? Was she his neighbor? Was the information she was telling the cop real? Did she have a beef against him because he had loud phone sex in the morning with his girlfriend? See, we don't know everything.

Why don't you go relax [removed][]

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.14  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Thomas @2.2.13    2 weeks ago
See, we don't know everything.

Exactly, many jump to judgment before the investigation is completed.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
2.2.15  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

[removed][]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.16  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.14    2 weeks ago
Lastly, I see your attempt to shift the discussion away from the Airman's death (likely wrongful) to outside foggy statements and ask that you stop it.

Ten of them to be precise.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.17  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.16    2 weeks ago

Some folks just can’t help themselves from letting their biases speak before the facts are established.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.18  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2.11    2 weeks ago
Again, to keep on track, was the killing of Senior Airman Roger Fortson, 23 justified?

How could anyone know at this point?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.19  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

You seem to be advocating for a "three-for" of some kind. Not. Going. To. Happen. Not. Even. In. The. Court. Of. Public. Opinion.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.20  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    2 weeks ago

Untrue. This officer was not threatened by the mere presence of a gun. It, the gun, is constitutionally protected. . . and it was not pointed in the officer's direction. The civilian has rights too.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.21  Texan1211  replied to  CB @2.2.20    2 weeks ago

untrue.

guns are not constitutionally protected.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.22  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.2.20    2 weeks ago

Untrue. This officer was not threatened by the mere presence of a gun. It, the gun, is constitutionally protected. . . and it was not pointed in the officer's direction. The civilian has rights too.

Exactly, he is probably a pussy that expects domestic disturbance calls to end badly for the LEO.  The airman was likely in his rights to be holding a pistol while opening his door and died protecting that right.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.23  CB  replied to  afrayedknot @2.2.7    2 weeks ago

Emphatically. I don't hate police. . . as I surely will call them when it is necessary for violence occurring, break-ins and even dogs that are a nuisance (although I will hesitate - I once almost got a neighbor's kid shot or killed because I did not understand that calling in what looks like unlawful entry will result in police arriving on the scene with gun/s drawn.).

It is not hatred of police to demand that they conduct new "lessons learned" sessions to improve their proper performance and reactions to guns being present in an encounter. It can't be that a gun in someone's hand (not pointed at anyone) is a rationale to pump one or SIX bullets into a man standing so close to you that you have to ask them to stand back to fire.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.24  CB  replied to  Thomas @2.2.9    2 weeks ago

It is stated that he thought someone was breaking in to his apartment. That would indicate that he heard a noise (loud banging for instance) and could not determine its cause in his front door area. Of course, it is police practice to not stand in front of a house/apartment door. As those doors can be shot through. I know about that from experience: One day an officer stopped by my house, saw there was a camera pointed at the front door. . . I responded to the knock on the door. . . looked through the peep hole. . . saw no one. . .opened the door cautiously. . .looked again, and an officer (canvassing the area I don't remember why). . . peeked his head around the corner to speak to me. What was important is this: He took up a 'position' out of the sight of my front door camera and under my garage door camera. (He was not seen on camera/s after doing so.)

Now. . . what if I had shown up at the door holding (my) a gun. . . looking to see who was 'playing around' with the door?  Bang!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.25  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.12    2 weeks ago

This is a problem. You won't modulate your understanding or position even when asked to do so agreeably. Just more dark, persistent, rhetoric.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.26  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.22    2 weeks ago

That is where the 'Force' should spend its time training and retraining its professionally paid officers. Police are surrounded and around guns all the time, even when they can't see them on civilians. . . they should be especially desensitized to seeing one pointed down to the floor.

Of course, I understand the danger in someone opening a door with a gun in his or her hands. . . but, that is no reason or can not be the be-all to officer's having expectation of passing a death sentence on an innocent civilian.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.27  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.2.26    2 weeks ago
That is where the 'Force' should spend its time training and retraining its professionally paid officers

I don’t disagree.  I also spent time training my troops  and daughter how to best handle a police altercation.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.2.28  Right Down the Center  replied to  CB @2.2.20    2 weeks ago
This officer was not threatened by the mere presence of a gun.

How do you know if the officer felt threatened?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
2.2.29  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    2 weeks ago
They hate cops.

Trumpists showing their hatred for cops at the U.S. Capitol:

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.2.30  devangelical  replied to  Gsquared @2.2.29    2 weeks ago

oh man... way to torpedo their guardians of law and order bullshit meme...

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.31  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.2.24    2 weeks ago
It is stated that he thought someone was breaking in to his apartment. That would indicate that he heard a noise (loud banging for instance) and could not determine its cause in his front door area.

The deputy’s video cam showed that he identified himself twice with the airman acknowledging that.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.32  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.31    2 weeks ago

I saw the video. Here it is: 

Bodycam video shows Florida deputy shoot, kill Air Force Airman

Changes nothing about what he heard from his perspective and the perspective of the person on the phone reciting what she was told by him. It is possible, of course, that someone banging on the front door hard (the officer was, he was trying to be heard ) can mimic the sound of a break-in

We all know that it was a deputy outside doing the 'banging.'  It is questionable how much a voice outside the apartment can be heard on the other side of a 'solid' door- all doors not being equal. 

Now then, here is what I want from you. Give proper consideration to what I share here without looking for some negative angle to respond to-it's all so time consuming and unnecessary. 

Because I am pretty sure you are able to extend your mind around what I have offered just now without the long-winded explanation  if you choose to do so.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.33  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.2.32    2 weeks ago
Give proper consideration to what I share here 

I always do. 

Because I am pretty sure you are able to extend your mind around what I have offered just now without the long-winded explanation  if you choose to do so.

My mind will remain "extended" until the investigation is complete.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.34  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.33    2 weeks ago

Ditto.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3  Greg Jones    2 weeks ago

The video on YouTube verifies that the officer announced twice. It shows the door opening and Fortson is shown standing there with a gun in his right hand pointed down. The video cuts off at that point so we can't see what transpired after that.

New body cam footage shows U.S. airman shot and killed by Florida deputies at doorstep (youtube.com)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago

The girlfriend said he walked to another room.

The woman said the cops didn't identify themselves.

Crump said the spyhole was covered.

And that got 10 votes up from the lefties.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.1  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    2 weeks ago

Let it go. You can't twist this into something. It's nothing. Votes on social media don't carry the day, nevertheless.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
3.2  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago
The video on YouTube verifies that the officer announced twice. It shows the door opening and Fortson is shown standing there with a gun in his right hand pointed down.

So..what was his crime? 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
3.2.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  MrFrost @3.2    2 weeks ago
So..what was his crime?

Are you looking for a premature speculation?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.2.2  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @3.2    2 weeks ago

So maybe after the video is censored, he points the gun at the deputy??

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
3.2.3  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2.2    2 weeks ago
he points the gun at the deputy??

Did he? 

I saw the full video. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

Let this be a lesson to everyone.

When you hear a race baiter like Ben Crump say the police didn't identify themselves and they covered the spyhole, you know it's a lie.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.1  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @4    2 weeks ago
Crump said Thursday that Fortson did not see anyone when he looked through the peephole and it appeared as if someone was covering it, citing the girlfriend. The video does not appear to show the deputy cover the peephole. He appears to be standing to the side of the door when he knocks and announces himself the first time.

Crump cited the "girlfriend." By definition, that means Crump did not see the incident or know what occurred and so he references. . .another relevant 'party' to the incident.  For you to act as an agent to correct the record and still back date yourself to calling Crump a "race baiter" without giving him time to correct his understanding of the situation in future remarks shows opportunism to render an insult, name-calling, and personal bias against this civil rights attorney. 

Lastly, I see your attempt to shift the discussion away from the Airman's death (likely wrongful) to outside foggy statements and ask that you stop it. Stop ignoring harms done for the sake of ideology. It's no way for actual people to live, have liberty, and find happiness!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  CB @4.1    2 weeks ago
Crump cited the "girlfriend." By definition, that means Crump did not see the incident or know what occurred and so he references.

A good lawyer should check his references before he comments.

For you to act as an agent to correct the record and still back date yourself to calling Crump a "race baiter" without giving him time to correct his understanding of the situation  in future remarks  shows opportunism to render an insult, name-calling, and personal bias against this civil rights attorney. 

It isn't just me. Here do some research:

Ben Crump’s race riots are just getting started - Washington Examiner


Lastly, I see your attempt to shift the discussion away from the Airman's death (likely wrongful) to outside foggy statements and ask that you stop it.

No, I have the EVIDENCE. Remember when all the white liberals wanted the police to wear body cam?   Well, there it is.

How is it working out for you?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
4.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.1    2 weeks ago
How is it working out for you?

Seems like far more officers have been cleared of wrongdoing by evidence of a body cam than not.

Next thing you know, leftists will claim body cams are racist.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.1.3  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

He cited the girlfriend. And when it comes to citing: that is how it is done. If you take issue with the 'citing' that is on you. I suggest you stop attempting to make this a source of contention. It is not. Worse, I believe you know it is not. Commonsense and experience should kick in (already).

You will not get a concession, because it is not due.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.1.4  CB  replied to  bugsy @4.1.2    2 weeks ago

That's unnecessary bias being put out for consumption. Body cams (any camera for that matter) is a tool that does a service to the scenes captured by them for human consumption and aid to reaching a conclusion: positive, negative, or inconclusive. Stop being so partisan that now you want to make the 'cams' victims in their own right.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
4.2  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @4    2 weeks ago
they covered the spyhole

To be fair, the officer did step back and to the side of the door and he might not have been seen by the Airman. And he might not have been heard, either. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.2.1  devangelical  replied to  Thomas @4.2    2 weeks ago

yeah, the airman was probably playing gangsta rap too loud to hear ... /s

any black man holding a gun is a freebie to LE in the south...

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.3  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @4    2 weeks ago

[]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

In conclusion:

I hope that people who should know better not post the narratives of Ben Crump.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
5.1  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    2 weeks ago
I hope that people who should know better not post the narratives of Ben Crump.

Because you don't like them and for no other reason.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
6  Greg Jones    2 weeks ago
 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1  CB  replied to  Greg Jones @6    2 weeks ago

It's tricky. . . . yes. But, killing innocent civilians is unacceptable too. Police departments are authorized to kill if necessary. . . it should give the departments a reason to try to understand this aspect of what to do when an "innocent' has a gun in hand. . .but otherwise is not presenting as dangerous. Just imagine if sad news came that somebody we know were done this way.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
7  Drinker of the Wry    2 weeks ago

We need more progressives to step forward and don the blue to reduce these killings.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1  devangelical  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @7    2 weeks ago

my nephew quit a PD in kentucky after almost 2 years because of all the goober racists on the force. he's a progressive...

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
7.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @7.1    2 weeks ago

he's a progressive...

and a quitter.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @7.1.1    2 weeks ago

working for a private security contractor in afghanistan paid a lot more.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
7.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @7.1.2    2 weeks ago

Didn’t most progressives here call them mercenaries, a few years ago?

 
 

Who is online



39 visitors